17/08/2026
A few years into fieldwork, you learn to watch the room, not just the recorder.
During a WASH study in [district], our team was asking households a standard set of questions about latrine usage — frequency, distance, satisfaction. The numbers looked fine. Usage rates were high. Nothing in the data suggested a problem.
Then one of our field moderators noticed something the survey wasn't built to catch: women in the household consistently avoided using the latrine after dark, walking to a neighbor's home instead — but nothing they said in the structured interview pointed to why.
It took an in-depth interview, not a checkbox, for the real reason to surface: no working light near the latrine, and a discomfort no one had put into words until someone sat down and asked openly.
That single observation changed the recommendation in our final report — from "usage is adequate" to "usage is adequate on paper, but a lighting and safety gap is suppressing actual use after dark."
No questionnaire was going to catch that. It took a field team trained to notice what people don't say, not just what they answer.
This is why IRC builds ethnographic observation and in-depth interviewing into our fieldwork as standard, not an add-on. The most important finding in a project is sometimes the one nobody thought to ask about.